Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Testing for traffic shaping / throttling on Three Ireland
#1
Every mobile network mast has an uplink to provide connectivity to that mast in much the same way as any telephone exchange.  Many rural masts get their connectivity over a microwave wireless link to another mast.  Masts in areas with good fibre infrastructure may get their connectivity over fibre and some also provide microwave connectivity to the rural masts. 

While a microwave link can provide plenty of capacity for the nodes of a single mast, some masts may be fed off a hierarchy or mesh of other masts with microwave links.  This can lead to severe congestion upstream such as with the main fibre connection if it does not have enough capacity.  This can lead to even quiet masts experiencing poor throughput. 

The Three network uses traffic shaping in many areas with many Content Delivery Network (CDN) getting priority over other types of traffic.  This is particularly noticeable in rural areas that face high netwok contention.  One good example of this is where general web browsing and downloading is incredibly slow while at the same time YouTube plays Full HD (1080p) on some videos without a glitch.

In the past, Three did traffic shaping by port #.  This led to the popular Ookla Speed test delivering 20Mbps+ test results when many websites were taking 10 times longer to open pages than on a 5Mbps DSL connection.  Back then it was also possible to exploit this traffic prioritisation by making a VPN connection over port 8008, which Ookla uses.  Three no longer prioritises by port # from what I can tell.  It is still possible to exploit traffic prioritisation through Cloudflare, which I may cover in a future post.  


Testing for traffic shaping

As traffic shaping affects many CDNs such as Google and Cloudflare, testing simply involves downloading a test file from a known fast host and then from a known prioritised host.  TestMy simulates this by timing how long it takes to download a known block size into the browser's cache, making it a useful test on phones where it's difficult to time a file download.  Don't confuse it with the popular Ookla speed test which uses a very diifferent test metholodogy to determine what the connection's speed currently gets up to.    


Test #1 – TestMy London vs Los Angeles servers

With most ISPs the London server generally performs much better than the Los Angeles server.  This makes sense as Los Angeles is in California, the west of the United States.  However, this TestMy host happens to be on a Vultr server that Three prioritises. 

These two links are set up to immediately start a 25MB download test against the London and Los Angeles servers: The following are test result examples on Three in Killybegs – London vs Los Angeles:

[Image: -RKQ6SurB.png] [Image: pDYwLOsMs.png]

The Three mast in Killybegs very rarely seldom gets over 30Mbps on the London server even early in the morning, yet the Los Angeles server oven gets over 60Mbps even at peak time!

The Three mast in Donegal town (Abbey Hotel) does not appear to be affected.  With line of sight of the mast, I regularly get over 100Mbps, sometimes approaching 180Mbps with the London server:

[Image: 06-Grus_w.png]


Test #2 – Heatnet vs Fosshub

Heanet’s servers are fed by multiple 10Gbps links, so any congestion is very unlikely at that end.  Fosshub on the other hand uses Cloudflare as its CDN, which gets prioritised. 

Compare the download speed of Kodi 64-bit from Heanet and Fosshub:
Test #3 – Leaseweb vs Vultr

The Leaseweb hosting provider has test files up to 10GB in the Netherlands (when testing from Ireland), but currently is not prioritised on Three.  The Vultr hosting provider also has test files, which happen to be on hosts that get prioritised. 

Time how long it takes to download the 100MB file from the following two hosts:
Reply
#2
Well, that's confirmed a few things! We are on a coastal rural three band 20 mast.
Test 1 London 13.6 Mb, Los Angeles 18.4
Heanet 40 s v Fosshub 22 s
Leaseweb 62s v Vultr 49s

Actual speedtest on speedof.me 10.8 DL, 18.9 UL and quite slow ms today, 64 ms but we usually get 45 ms. This is mid afternoon before the evening congestion.
The sad thing is I actually think 10 Mb is "quite good!" these days. If only it would actually stay there...

By the way we found a cheaper source for those Yagi aerials, but doesn't look like getting one would really help much.
https://www.korexmall.com/lowcostmobile-...612638.htm
Reply
#3
That's a great price for that pair of band 20 antennas, half that of Amazon! 

At that price, I think it's worth upgrading, even just to improve the prioritised traffic.  Three prioritises most major CDN traffic, so a few main bandwidth hogs such as Windows updates, popular YouTube videos and Google Drive syncing would benefit.  Whenever Three upgrades the backhaul serving your area (e.g. preparing for 5G), you should get the full benefit then. 

While travelling home with someone from Donegal, I tested London vs Los Angeles in Donegal, Dunkineely and Killybegs around 8pm with TestMy.  This shows how severe their traffic shaping can get in affected areas, London vs Los Angeles:

Donegal town (5pm):
[Image: Vsv_OBmWo.png] [Image: qzuTXjPno.png]

Dunkineely (7:38pm):
[Image: jyddGaSp0.png] [Image: 4AhwPQDe9.png]

Killybegs (7:55pm):
[Image: ZyKTvEhGG.png] [Image: ~wuZafMDO.png]

While going through Dunkineely, I had to manually choose a smaller 12MB block as it was taking too long, whereas the Los Angeles test flew with the 50MB block.  From looking at the "Test in Progress" graph, it would likely cause buffering issues with bandwidth sensitive services such as live streaming, video calls, etc:

   

It was only within the past year that Donegal town got upgraded as it had similar traffic shaping, unlike now where the nearer London test runs quicker as I would expect.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)